“O’Malley told [Domestic Policy Director Cecilia] Muñoz not to send any of the children to the facility in Westminster, Md., that the White House was looking at,” Politico reported. “It’s a conservative part of the state, he warned. The children were at risk of getting harassed, or worse, he said.”

My general prediction is that they will choose either an old stalwart (a John Kerry) or an exotic newcomer (a Barack Obama). If neither of these really takes off, they'll pick Clinton, who's sort of both and sort of neither. O'Malley doesn't sound like either, so I'd be surprised to see him get picked.

That said, the fact that he's a gov puts him leaps and bounds above anyone on the Dem short list so far, in my opinion. Which is, of course, another reason he's less likely - Dems aren't usually interested in my opinion.

The guy is a white male, who is pro-illegal immigration, and pro-gun-control. His chances, right now, of winning the Presidency are extraordinarily low.

The reason that Warren (despite her age) is probably a better candidate, and probably part of why Obama won, was that they were both first term Dem. Senators without records. Obama, in particular, apparently went out of his way to not vote on anything the least bit controversial. But, that is also one of the reasons that Obama is such an abysmal President - he had no qualifications, training, or experience for the job.

O'Malley has the advantage that he actually has some executive experience, but that is much more than offset with the fact that his record is going to look far left to much of the country. With the current numbers of illegal kids (and fake kids) massing across our southern border, trying to make MD essentially a sanctuary state is probably not likely to play well in Peoria. And, enacting stupid gun control measures that abridge 1st Amdt. rights w/o any consequent actual reduction in gun violence, merely making the law abiding more vulnerable, is also not going to play well throughout much of the country.

MD is too far to the left for its white male governor to have much of a chance in a national election. And, I think that the Dems know this, which is why it is looking more like Hillary! v. Warren right now. (But probably keeping Slo Joe Biden in the debates for comic effect).

It's certainly possible for him to beat her for the nomination. He has a number of weaknesses--mostly the health care exchange rollout in Maryland--but the state's economy has been doing pretty well (mostly due to the DC suburbs and government jobs) and crime in Baltimore has dropped since he became mayor and then governor. It's not as though Hillary has any accomplishments to brag about, and she never was a chief executive of a major city or state. So on record, I think he comes out slightly ahead of her.

He's making a push for the left wing of the party, which has never been comfortable with the Clintons and only supported them out of default. If O'Malley runs a smart campaign and can speak well I could see him threatening her from the left. Add in a few typical Hillary mistakes--and she will make them, as she's an awful politician--and you could see momentum going towards the challenger. Plus--the media does not want a cakewalk. They will magnify her gaffes and give a lot of attention to credible challengers.

It depends on a few things--O'Malley not making any major mistakes, whether any other challengers from the left split that faction of the party--but I'd say he has a good chance of taking her down.

O’Malley needs to address the causes of mass emigration and the consequences of overpopulation for American men, women, and children. It's intolerable to advocate for abortion/murder to reduce the problem set, while inviting immigrants to replace and displace Americans.

"I think they should take all the "refugees" and put them in Maryland."

As a current citizen of Maryland, I'm OK with that, as long as they get packed into Baltimore, PG and Monkey Counties, but to be fair, I think they should be spread among the other states that voted for Obama, concentrating on places with high unemployment.

It's not so much that he can beat Hillary, but if she becomes so medically imcompetent that even the Palace Guard media is forced to notice and Warren implodes (or is at least bloodied) he hopes to position himself as the one person under the age of 60 still standing in the race.

He would face a real Dukakis problem in the General, tho': in my part of PA we get some Maryland stations, and Maryland must surely be one of the few places where Democratic contenders actually run ads in all parts of the state that trumpet the fact Obama supports them ...

Martin O'Malley and his ilk are the reason I moved out of Maryland 17 years ago. Unfortunately Northern Virginia is crowded with other refugees from deep blue states who did not make the connection between the politics of the state they left and the reason why Virginia is a better place to live. Consequently they continue to vote Dumbocrat and gradually make Virginia a worse and worse place to raise your kids.

Rob is right - he's running for Veep. With his term limit up this year, he can't afford to stay out of the limelight until 2020 or beyond. So he runs for President, drops out gracefully during the primary and gets selected as VP. Maybe. The problem with that is with a Hillary campaign, he's not a good running mate being from blue state MD. He'd have a better chance if some dark horse emerges (maybe from the South or West) and takes it.

That being said, he's my governor, and he's a sack of crap. He's raised taxes/tolls/fees multiple times on the residents and only because the state is so blue they won't vote him out. I'd be happy if he just went away. I think all of his "accomplishments" in Maryland would appear as "failures" to middle America.

I'm OK with that, as long as they get packed into Baltimore, PG and Monkey Counties.

Never heard of Monkey county. Quite humorous. Did live in PG county for maybe 4 years back around 1980 or so. Montgomery county had a lot more money back then than PG county, and PG always felt a bit more red neck/blue collar. And, was why I was not surprised that Maryland was kept in the union by parking the largest union army, the Army of the Potomac around DC. PG county actually felt more "southern" to me than did Arlington county (VA) where I lived right before. Of course, that was 35 years ago - but I was living and working at a federal facility there.

As richlb says, O'Malley is from a reliably Democratic state, and that's a negative for him as Hillary's vice presidential running mate. But he's male and Catholic and has experience as a mayor and governor rather than as a senator, which are all points in his favor, and he's considerably younger than Hillary. O'Malley would be a logical choice. (The botched rollout of the Maryland Obamacare website won't help him, though.)

The commenters here who dismiss O'Malley because "Maryland's a mess" or because they can't stand him as governor are missing the mark. Conservatives have repeatedly been flummoxed at the polls by underestimating Democrats. Remember in 2008 the GOP assumed the American people would never elect a half-term senator with no record or experience? At the time, Obama turned that into a plus--that year voters wanted an outsider who wasn't connected with the mess the country was in. Likewise, Massachusetts liberals cared a lot less about Liz Warren's phony Indian ancestry, because they liked her left-wing message and did not like the idea of Senator Brown helping the GOP get a majority in the Senate. Voters are a lot less harsh when it comes to someone on their own team.

O'Malley will spin his tenure in Baltimore and Maryland as positive ones, where he raised taxes to preserve beloved liberal programs, fought the gun lobby, brought crime down and enhanced public transportation projects. Where these "accomplishments" are questionable to conservatives, or even negatives, they are red meat for the liberals who will dominate Democratic primaries and who feel lukewarm towards Hillary. So Baltimore is still crime ridden and poor? It's all relative--he'll compare it to how the city was a decade ago--Bill Clinton pulled the same trick when the GOP tried to point out that Arkansas was still a mess in 1992.

The fact that he doesn't come from a big state or a swing state doesn't really matter these days--the Democrats have an electoral advantage no matter where their nominee comes from. O'Malley may be a "who's he?" now, but this all changes once the media profiles come out, the primaries get under way, and the public pays attention. Being sort of unknown can be a plus--he has a chance to set his image. Hillary already has at least half the country disliking her, and many more feeling tepid about her.

If O'Malley did somehow get the Dem nomination, he would have a hard time in the general (unless the GOP does what it does best and hobble their own nominee, throwing the election). Conservatives would automatically be motivated to vote against him, and moderates may sour on his leftist record and rhetoric. If Obama's final two years of his tenure are about the same as his past twelve months, the Democrats are going to have some serious headwinds anyway. But a leftist populist could even run against Obama's record, and make a strong if not successful run. The GOP would be wise not to underestimate their opponent no matter who s/he is, particularly with the demographic advantages the Democrats have.

Whether it'll be O'Malley, however, comes down the the campaign--is he any good on the stump, can he raise money, and run a smart campaign that can put enough pressure on Hillary to force her into Gaffe City. Obama provided the blueprint for this in 2008, the only question is whether O'Malley (or anyone) can pull that off in 2016.

“It’s a conservative part of the state, he warned. The children were at risk of getting harassed, or worse, he said.”

-- If a Republican had said something like that about liberals, his or her hopes for anything would be shot. The fact the governor of a state can imply around 40-60% of the country's population are racists liable to murder children and be considered a potential presidential candidate tells us all we need to know about what hte left thinks of "civility."

-- So did McCain. He actually DID a lot of the things Obama claimed to do/have done [worked across the aisle, even if conservatives didn't always like the result, was willing to buck his party, was hard on government waste/cronyism, even if not as hard as conservatives would like, and was willing to stick to his campaign promise regarding public financing.]

Martin " Tommy Carcetti" O/Malley is a clown, and a malignant one. I don't know if he can keep that under wraps through a whole campaign. The far left loves their candidates obnoxious, but I don't think that appeals to the middle. Think Howard Dean with a goofier look.

Stories about him cooking the books on crime stats, both in Baltimore and the State House, never seeing a tax he didn't like, gangs running the jails in Baltimore, population and job exodus - they should take him out, if we had a real press corps. That of course is a big if.

It's not so much that he can beat Hillary, but if she becomes so medically imcompetent that even the Palace Guard media is forced to notice and Warren implodes (or is at least bloodied)

The problem that candidates like Warren tend to have is that they are political novices. They make a lot of stupid mistakes, and say a lot of stupid things. These were well hidden from us when Obama ran for President by a complicit media working hard for his election (and reelection). He really made a lot more gaffes than his opponents did - they were just buried from most of the voting public.

Warren is even more a novice than Obama was, having run precisely one campaign, and won it, in the darkest blue of states. Can a 67 year old white woman, who repeatedly advanced herself with a bogus claim of one or two Indian chromosomes, really capture the imaginations of the mainstream media, enough that they will commit economic suicide covering for her?

O'Malley has the advantage that he is an experienced politician (and a bit younger than either Warren or Hillary!). He is probably much less likely to make the sorts of amateur mistakes that Warren, and maybe even Hillary!, would make. (Though Hillary! is married to one of the premier politicians of our lifetimes, and some of that should have rubbed off on her).

If a Republican had said something like that about liberals, his or her hopes for anything would be shot. The fact the governor of a state can imply around 40-60% of the country's population are racists liable to murder children and be considered a potential presidential candidate tells us all we need to know about what hte left thinks of "civility."

I miss the days when lip service was paid to representing EVERYBODY in a state or country and not just, specifically, your supporters.

The Dems routinely denigrate 40-50% of the electorate as being violent, women-hating, bigots. But when whites do not support them, it's because whites are racist --- not just tired of being referred to as murderers-to-be.

Martin O'Malley and his ilk are the reason I moved out of Maryland 17 years ago. Unfortunately Northern Virginia is crowded with other refugees from deep blue states who did not make the connection between the politics of the state they left and the reason why Virginia is a better place to live. Consequently they continue to vote Dumbocrat and gradually make Virginia a worse and worse place to raise your kids.

Democrats are like locusts or crabgrass. Take your pick.

-- So did McCain. He actually DID a lot of the things Obama claimed to do/have done [worked across the aisle, even if conservatives didn't always like the result, was willing to buck his party, was hard on government waste/cronyism, even if not as hard as conservatives would like, and was willing to stick to his campaign promise regarding public financing.]

But pissing off your base seems like an exceedingly poor strategy in an election. Doing so to keep your opponents happy seems to be an even worse idea.

Is this the Governor whose state police think stop immigration graffiti is a hate crime? http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2014/07/15/state-police-investigate-hate-crime-graffiti-attacking-illegal-immigration/

His Irish band, O'Malleys March, performed regularly up until late in his mayoral years. That experience will translate well on the stump. He is also very handsome, so women will like him as their new boyfriend. My book group of educated, professional middle aged women would giggle over him and wonder about getting him to perform shirtless. This was in spite of (or perhaps because of) knowing what a hound he was.